If we won the lottery I would rather not see us pick Jones 1st. I'd either prefer to take MacKinnon or swap with Florida or Colorado and pick up an additional pick.
Out of all 32 defenceman picked in the top 5 since 1993, only 2 have been stars (so far).
Yeah I said it before I wouldn't be surprised if Lowe ignores their need for a defenseman and goes for a flashy forward. It's pretty obvious he doesn't have a clue how to build a team.
It's possible to think the defense needs improvement, but that the 2013 1st round draft pick isn't the best way to address that position.
If we won the lottery I would rather not see us pick Jones 1st. I'd either prefer to take MacKinnon or swap with Florida or Colorado and pick up an additional pick.
Out of all 32 defenceman picked in the top 5 since 1993, only 2 have been stars (so far).
But we're not talking about a Lindros situation here, where one player is clearly better - in those case, it's BPA every time.
But when you are talking Monahan/Nurse/Lindholm, talking about BPA is pointless. They are inter-changable with respect to likelihood of success.
Take the player that suits your situation.
I don't agree that Nurse is in the same tier as those two, I think both are better prospects than Nurse, but that aside I'd still generally prefer F's than D in the first round. Scouts are better IMO at assessing forwards than they are at assessing defencemen. It's not a knock on Nurse, or any D, IMO, to say that I'd prefer EDM to draft a F than a D at that spot in the draft simply because I think the odds of the F turning out are better than the odds of the D working out as expected.
EDM could use a D, but that doesn't necessarily mean the draft is the best way to address that need.
I disagree. You never waste those high draft picks - especially in a year like this which can really mean a lot to a franchise picking high. Veterans as a supporting cast can be had for other pieces and lower draft picks. Having blue-chip talent year after year to come in can really set you up for years to come through play and for controlling salary. No smart team will give up a top 5 pick for a veteran presence. Other deals can be made for that.
I just think they need to try something different thats all. I would never want the Flames to trade our high pick so inherently I agree with you. With the Oil I think it's an exceptional situation wherein - impact player now > potential higher impact player in 5 years.
Or they could consider moving that pick for an high potential top-pairing dman who's further along in the development curve (think Eric Gudbranson or something).
Voynov has surpassed Doughty on their depth chart, his contract is big, and I think they could look to move Doughty before his NTC kicks ala Richards and Carter.
The one thing holding it back is that they will be division rivals after realignment.
Voynov has surpassed Doughty on their depth chart, his contract is big, and I think they could look to move Doughty before his NTC kicks ala Richards and Carter.
no
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Canada 02 For This Useful Post:
I really want MacKinnon and I would try and trade up to get him but I wouldn't include Brodie, Backlund or Sven to do it.
Another thing to consider is that as much as it seems to be a CP consensus that we like Lindholm, don't be surprised if he goes earlier than the rankings to Nashville. I remember reading or hearing that he has connection with Filip Forsberg (friends or former teammates/linemates) for whom they just traded for at the deadline.
